Goodbye Linux: Why am ditching linux and going back to Windows 10

On 07/10/2019 23.13, nospam wrote:
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

Also, there is not a mode for "do all updates now, nothing else and
finish it up as fast as possible". I leave it alone on a table, go away,
and when I come back it is waiting for my permission to reboot or do it
after my work day. Thus, it takes days.

click the update button settings.

i do that at *my* convenience so i won't get a 'restart now' at the
wrong time.

The options on the Home version are limited. There is no button to
disable automatic updates.

however, there *is* a button to request them at your convenience.

https://windows10skill.com/wp-conten...ck-for-updates.
jpg

I know it. It doesn't do exactly what I'm asking for.



And that is updates to the system. Many apps update separately on their
own, and some require a reboot.

apps shouldn't require a reboot unless they install a driver, which is
the exception.

Depends on the app. The TomTom application often updated its USB driver,
for instance. I don't recall if it caused a reboot or not.

why would it need a usb driver???

a gps device should show up as a standard serial device, which sends an
nmea stream.

Why? Because! LOL!

It is proprietary, and it does things to avoid people tinkering with it.
The USB is non-standard. It poses itself as a network provider, and
Windows connects to that new network. But only the proper application
can connect with some encryption system.

A TomTom is not a standard GPS device.

Years ago people connected to the TomTom and third party applications
appeared that did nice extra things, like add voices, create backups,
upload/download points of interest and favourites, map editors...

Fortunately, my current TomTom connects directly to the home WiFi spots
and never (till now) needed a computer.




--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 07/10/2019 21.08, Chris wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 07/10/2019 12.10, Chris wrote:
Brian Dee wrote:
Let the denials begin.
You Linux geeks might want to read this one because this is what real
world people think of Linux. And if you are unable to read anything
but ASCII code, have your sister read it to you.

The tone isn't helping, but most of your points are pretty accurate.

The fact that the same post was posted a year ago doesn't help. And as
it was sent in order to stir the pot in anger, ie, trolling, doesn't
induce us to comment.

Ah, I didn't realise.

Your comments are nice, though.

Thanks!

Welcome :-)


...

VLC Media Player is out right bad compared
to Pot Player on Windows. Nothing on linux compared to MusicBee on
Windows. I won't even embarass you guys by talking about JRiver Media
Center. Most linux desktop softwares simply lacks the feautures,
polish and finesse compared to their Windows counterpart.
And no, it is not MS or Adobe's fault that those softwares are not
available on Linux. You guys continuously rant about evil proprietary
software.

Proprietary software is a real problem. Computing in the mainstream has
been around a few decades now and people are finding that files they
created not that long ago are impossible to read. And this is now spilling
over into the device space. I see the new BMW can be opened with your
smartphone. What happens when BMW stop supporting your version of phone?
You're locked out of your car until you buy a compatible phone? This is
happening with apps all over the place, e.g. Sonos, IoT kettles.

It's terrible for consumers. Linux shows there is an alternative. With
benefits for all.

FTR I use all three platforms regularly and curse at all of them, but my
preferred is still macOS. Primarily because it's Unix with office and
adobe. Windows is the worst IMO. The only thing it's got going for it is
gaming. I'm sure this is going to make me VERY popular around here

Don't forget that Linux is both free and gratis, made largely by a
myriad of volunteers in their own time.

Kinda. Kernel development has a significant contribution from paid
developers (intel, Microsoft, Google, etc). I can't find recent figures,
but they contribute about 20% of the code.

However, the vast majority of user applications are by volunteers doing it
in their own time.

Correct.


There is no boss that says what
style to use, so there can't be much consistency.

Try telling that to Linus Torvalds He very much is the boss and there is
very clear expectation in style and quality.

Certainly! But the kernel is not all there is in Linux. It is "only" the
kernel.


There are often
alternatives for each task, made in their own styles. And there may be
no interest for finesse: when the tool does the task that the people
that made it wanted, there is no need to polish it nice and beautiful.
Thus there are so many CLIs instead of GUIs.

Which causes newbies all sorts of problems. The choice can be overwhelming.

True.

But they can stick to a distribution and use the distribution default
choices, which usually should work. Remains the choice of desktop,
though :-p



As I say, all gratis and free, so if it lacks this feature or that
polish, no matter. The alternative has a cost.

Or you can contribute your own improvements.

Yep.


The consistency you find with perseverance. One ends knowing how things
will work. And if they work, they keep working. Then, there are no
virus. I have not suffered a virus in more than 20 years.

And finally, just use the OS that works for you best, or even better,
the OS that works better for your tasks. No bitterness or acrimony,
leave others in peace :-)

That's far too sensible. What would we argue over then?

The finer points :-D

Right now, I'm writing in Linux, and at my side is a laptop doing
updates of its Windows. Let's say I use 95% Linux, except some
proprietary tools that only run in Windows. :-)

I don't criticize people for their choice of OS. Others do, though.

Be happy!

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Chris wrote:
nospam wrote:
Chris wrote:

One thing i really hate about windows and macOS is that a machine that
hasn't been used in a little while will spend the first 5-10 minutes upon
first use checking for updates from the various "stores" or applications
that automatically check. Rendering the machine almost useless during that
time. Then you need to respond to each of the notifications that this Tom,
Dick or Harry application needs to be updated/restarted. Such a PITA.

only because you set it to auto-update.

So? That's good practice.

Bunk. The update systems of M$ and Apple are company trojans.

----snip----

Carlos E.R. wrote:
[...]

[About Windows systems:]

I'd rather trigger updates manually when I'm ready for it. And then do
it as fast as possible and get it over.

And that is updates to the system. Many apps update separately on their
own, and some require a reboot.

And most if not all 'apps' have their own update mechanisms, which are
all different.

Often it's not possible to prevent or postpone updates and update
notifications often get in your face while you're using the computer.

For example if you let Thunderbird "Check for updates, but let me
choose whether to install them", then sooner or later TB *will* notify
you and will keep nagging you (default daily) until you accept the
update. There is no "No thank you!" choice. (And no amount of hacking
Preferences - also not the un-/badly documented ones - with the Config
Editor will change that.)

And that's just *one* of many, many, such 'apps'!

And don't get me started on the amount of costly mobile data this
non-sense costs when you're travelling and using a mobile Wi-Fi hotspot!
:-(

[Rewind:]

Like having to go out in a hurry, power off the machine, and *then* it
says it is going to apply some updates, which takes an hour. And another
on the next boot.

I prevent problems like this by using Hibernate instead of Shut Down.
When hibernated, the system doesn't use/need power, so taking the laptop
with you is no problem. (FWIW, I nearly never Shut Down my laptop, only
Sleep or Hibernate.)

Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 07/10/2019 21.08, Chris wrote:
Carlos E.R.
Don't forget that Linux is both free and gratis, made largely by a
myriad of volunteers in their own time.

Kinda. Kernel development has a significant contribution from paid
developers (intel, Microsoft, Google, etc). I can't find recent figures,
but they contribute about 20% of the code.

However, the vast majority of user applications are by volunteers doing it
in their own time.

Correct.


There is no boss that says what
style to use, so there can't be much consistency.

Try telling that to Linus Torvalds He very much is the boss and there is
very clear expectation in style and quality.

Certainly! But the kernel is not all there is in Linux. It is "only" the
kernel.

Being pedantic, linux is *only* the kernel. What we all call linux includes
all the userland GNU tools: bash, less, tar, etc. Then there's the desktop
environment as well.


There are often
alternatives for each task, made in their own styles. And there may be
no interest for finesse: when the tool does the task that the people
that made it wanted, there is no need to polish it nice and beautiful.
Thus there are so many CLIs instead of GUIs.

Which causes newbies all sorts of problems. The choice can be overwhelming.

True.

But they can stick to a distribution and use the distribution default
choices, which usually should work. Remains the choice of desktop,
though :-p

People just can't handle so much choice early on


Right now, I'm writing in Linux, and at my side is a laptop doing
updates of its Windows. Let's say I use 95% Linux, except some
proprietary tools that only run in Windows. :-)

Have you used the Windows subsystem for linux for anything significant?
I've installed it and run a few things on it, but windows isn't my main
desktop so can't say any more than it's a fun experiment.

I don't criticize people for their choice of OS. Others do, though.

Be happy!

nospam wrote:
In article , Chris
wrote:

One thing i really hate about windows and macOS is that a machine that
hasn't been used in a little while will spend the first 5-10 minutes upon
first use checking for updates from the various "stores" or applications
that automatically check. Rendering the machine almost useless during that
time. Then you need to respond to each of the notifications that this Tom,
Dick or Harry application needs to be updated/restarted. Such a PITA.

only because you set it to auto-update.

So? That's good practice .

it is indeed.

the point is that if the system is set to auto-update, don't be
surprised when it does exactly that.

if the updates occur when you'd rather they didn't, then tell the
system to not auto-update, then update at your convenience.

the choice is entirely up to the user.

Indeed. It'd be nice if they didn't all start immediately after booting. It
wouldn't be hard to schedule a check randomly 5-10 minutes after booting.

unfortunately, windows makes that more difficult than it should be.
disabling auto-update on mac, ios and android is easy.

worse is if you've got one or more cloud sync services running. Although,
they are quite easy to pause.

those are separate and take almost no time because the amounts of data
is small.

Really? I must be confused regarding the quantity of data in mine, then.
The Box sync client is real resource hog. Can easily grab 150% CPU.

disabling auto-update on macos is easy, not so much on win10.

For the os maybe, but not the myriad of programs that are installed. Many
make it difficult to avoid.

for the apps too.

Nope

it's also not useless while it's checking and downloading updates.

Wrong.

not wrong.

Yes wrong

only
when a reboot is required is it an annoyance, and win10 likes to do
that at inopportune times.

Not only.

only then.

downloading (or uploading) anything in the background has no noticeable
effect on windows, mac ios or android.

Wrong (again).

Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 07/10/2019 18.18, Ken Springer wrote:
On 10/7/19 8:16 AM, Unsteadyken wrote:
In article ,
Â* Kenny McCormack says...

The typical user is going to find his machine more-or-less useless
during
this period.

This user finds that there is no noticeable effect and is usually
unaware that an update is taking place until the Restart Windows pop up
appears.

This effect seems to be linked to how the user operates his system.Â* I
was presented with a W10 laptop that was used just a few minutes every
week, and then turned off.Â* The owner wanted me to reinstall W10.

After looking at the system, which was basically unusable, I *slowly*
was able to get to Updates and Security, and discovered the huge backlog
of updates in the queue.

I left the computer running, and 22 hours later, all updates were
installed, and the system ran fine.Â* GÂ* I told the owner to turn it on
once in a while, and then just leave it alone for few hours.

The owner contacted me again about a month ago, same thing.Â* I asked him
if he'd followed my advice, and "Nope".Â* LOLÂ* Told him to leave it on,
and now the system is fine, again.

Yep. This is highly inconvenient to people like me, that double boot,
with Linux being the default.

About 4 hours ago, I booted Windows 10H on my laptop, and told it to
search for updates. Now I look at it again, and it is waiting for the
non busy hours to reboot - I have not used the machine at all in this time.

Normally I hate the machine rebooting without it being told to, because
I'm looking or waiting at some thing, like postprocessing photos. But
when I tell it to update I want it to do all the updates and reboots
ASAP and get it over.

Then there is the issue that when it reboots on its own it will default
to Linux, so when I come back I have to reboot manually, and then tell
it to scan for updates a second time, till there are no more updates,
and only then I can fully use the machine. In the end, more than one day
to do updates.

Why Microsoft hasn't learned how to install all updates in one go and do a
single reboot, i don't know? All other OSs manage it

So now it want to install accumulates updates to 1903.

And it is going at 100% CPU, so I can not work with the machine till it
finishes.

Chris wrote:
nospam wrote:

downloading (or uploading) anything in the background has no noticeable
effect on windows, mac ios or android.

Wrong (again).

The situation in question, is when Windows Update opens
20 connections to the Microsoft server. This allows one
machine on your LAN (the one running Windows Update),
to "starve" machines which are only opening one connection
while you web surf.

It *is* possible for a Windows 10 machine to degrade the
interactive user experience on a second machine. And it's
based on the round robin serving method of your home
router.

You can modify the number of connections that Windows Updates
opens. In Pro, you use GPEDIT for this.

Neither BITS nor DoSVC has ideal network traffic control,
so these policies are "approximations" to the control
you might desire.

https://i.postimg.cc/B6Kby0kS/thrott...GPEDIT-MSC.gif

Paul

In article , Chris
wrote:

worse is if you've got one or more cloud sync services running. Although,
they are quite easy to pause.

those are separate and take almost no time because the amounts of data
is small.

Really? I must be confused regarding the quantity of data in mine, then.

how much stuff are you syncing on a regular basis?

The Box sync client is real resource hog. Can easily grab 150% CPU.

then something is wrong. that's not normal.




downloading (or uploading) anything in the background has no noticeable
effect on windows, mac ios or android.

Wrong (again).

not wrong.

background network activity has little to no impact on the performance
of the system, nor do other background tasks.

if that's not the case for you, then something is wrong with your
system.

In article , Chris
wrote:

Then there is the issue that when it reboots on its own it will default
to Linux, so when I come back I have to reboot manually, and then tell
it to scan for updates a second time, till there are no more updates,
and only then I can fully use the machine. In the end, more than one day
to do updates.

Why Microsoft hasn't learned how to install all updates in one go and do a
single reboot, i don't know? All other OSs manage it

most of the time they do, however, in some cases, an update might
require a previous update to have been installed, and that's not unique
to microsoft either.

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 19:48:41 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:

Really? I must be confused regarding the quantity of data in mine, then.
The Box sync client is real resource hog. Can easily grab 150% CPU.

150% is a lot of CPU. In the old days, about the best you could hope for
was 100%, but things have improved since then. ;-)

On Tue, 08 Oct 2019 16:09:24 -0400, Paul wrote:

The situation in question, is when Windows Update opens
20 connections to the Microsoft server. This allows one
machine on your LAN (the one running Windows Update),
to "starve" machines which are only opening one connection
while you web surf.

It *is* possible for a Windows 10 machine to degrade the
interactive user experience on a second machine. And it's
based on the round robin serving method of your home
router.

Is that in theory, or observed? I'm guessing it's mostly theory.

Once a month or so, I fire up 20-something VMs, with 10-12-14 of them being
Win 10 on a bad day, and I kick off a simultaneous Check For Updates on
each of them. I see increased utilization of CPU, RAM, and drive(s) on the
VM host, but I never see any effect on network responsiveness. Not on the
VM host, and not on any other PCs that happen to be active at the moment.
I'd say that a router that struggles with 20 connections, or 100
connections, is likely to be of 2001 vintage or otherwise has issues of its
own.

Char Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 08 Oct 2019 16:09:24 -0400, Paul wrote:

The situation in question, is when Windows Update opens
20 connections to the Microsoft server. This allows one
machine on your LAN (the one running Windows Update),
to "starve" machines which are only opening one connection
while you web surf.

It *is* possible for a Windows 10 machine to degrade the
interactive user experience on a second machine. And it's
based on the round robin serving method of your home
router.

Is that in theory, or observed? I'm guessing it's mostly theory.

Once a month or so, I fire up 20-something VMs, with 10-12-14 of them being
Win 10 on a bad day, and I kick off a simultaneous Check For Updates on
each of them. I see increased utilization of CPU, RAM, and drive(s) on the
VM host, but I never see any effect on network responsiveness. Not on the
VM host, and not on any other PCs that happen to be active at the moment.
I'd say that a router that struggles with 20 connections, or 100
connections, is likely to be of 2001 vintage or otherwise has issues of its
own.


It's observed actually.

I wouldn't have bothered researching that, if there
wasn't a reason.

Paul

On Tue, 08 Oct 2019 19:44:52 -0400, Paul wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 08 Oct 2019 16:09:24 -0400, Paul wrote:

The situation in question, is when Windows Update opens
20 connections to the Microsoft server. This allows one
machine on your LAN (the one running Windows Update),
to "starve" machines which are only opening one connection
while you web surf.

It *is* possible for a Windows 10 machine to degrade the
interactive user experience on a second machine. And it's
based on the round robin serving method of your home
router.

Is that in theory, or observed? I'm guessing it's mostly theory.

Once a month or so, I fire up 20-something VMs, with 10-12-14 of them being
Win 10 on a bad day, and I kick off a simultaneous Check For Updates on
each of them. I see increased utilization of CPU, RAM, and drive(s) on the
VM host, but I never see any effect on network responsiveness. Not on the
VM host, and not on any other PCs that happen to be active at the moment.
I'd say that a router that struggles with 20 connections, or 100
connections, is likely to be of 2001 vintage or otherwise has issues of its
own.


It's observed actually.

I wouldn't have bothered researching that, if there
wasn't a reason.

Ok, thanks, Paul. I shall remain skeptical.

On 08/10/2019 21:09, Paul wrote:
Chris wrote:
nospam wrote:

downloading (or uploading) anything in the background has no noticeable
effect on windows, mac ios or android.

Wrong (again).

The situation in question,

nospam's heavy snipping and narrowing of the point to suit his argument
is the issue here. As per usual.